University of Cincinnati

U UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI

Date:

I, , hereby submit this original work as part of the requirements for the degree of:

It is entitled:

Student Signature:

This work and its defense approved by:

Committee Chair:

Approval of the electronic document:

I have reviewed the Thesis/Dissertation in its final electronic format and certify that it is an accurate copy of the document reviewed and approved by the committee.

Committee Chair signature:

A New Perspective on the Italian Songs of Franz Liszt: an Italian Perspective

The Graduate School of the University of Cincinnati

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

DOCTOR OF MUSICAL ARTS

in the Performance Studies Division of the College-Conservatory of Music

2009

Randall A. Umstead

B.M., Oklahoma Baptist University, 2001

M.M. University of Cincinnati, 2003

ABSTRACT

This document addresses a gap in the scholarly study of Franz Liszt. It argues that Liszt is currently viewed primarily as a composer who exhibits German traits. His works, therefore, that fit the German stereotype, i.e. orchestral and piano works, receive the bulk of academic attention. This document argues that while this contemporary view is largely valid, Liszt's Italian songs do not fit the German view. The modern view of

Liszt is analyzed, as well as the implications of this view. Evidence is reviewed that supports the notion of a strong Italian character to the vocal writing in Liszt's Italian songs, including historical evidence, similarity to the works of bel canto composers, and how the changes between his first and second verses of the Petrarch Sonnets reflect a change from an Italian character in the first versions to a more German character in the revisions.

February 26, 2009

Randall Allan Umstead

iii

In completing such a lengthy process there are countless people who deserve my thanks. The first and most important person in this process is Prof. Kenneth Griffiths, my document advisor. Without his patience, guidance, and encouragement, I would have given up this project long ago. I also wish to thank the other members of my committee, Profs. Mary Henderson-Stucky and Barbara

Paver. The commitment of time and the encouragement will never be forgotten.

CONTENTS

CHAPTER I Introduction to the problem of liszt ...... 1

CHAPTER II BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ...... 5

CHAPTER III COMMON HISTORICAL INTERPRETATIONS OF LISZT ...... 8

CHAPTER IV IMPACT OF COMMON HISTORICAL INTERPRETATIONS ...... 18

CHAPTER V HISTORICAL SUPPORT FOR AN ITALIAN PERSPECTIVE...... 31

CHAPTER VI COMPARISON OF LISZT‘S ITALIAN SONGS TO BEL CANTO STYLE ...... 46

CHAPTER VII COMPARISON OF LISZT'S FIRST AND SECOND VERSIONS OF TRE SONETTI DI PETRARCA ...... 61

CHAPTER VIII CONCLUSION ...... 72

WORKS CITED ...... 75

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION TO THE PROBLEM OF LISZT

Franz Liszt is studied by musicologists and theorists, admired by performers as a virtuoso, and he serves as a source of great fascination for those interested in the gossip- column side of music history. One would be inclined to think that little could still be left to discover about Liszt, and that same doubt could be expressed about a countless number of other figures in music history. He lived during a time close enough to our own that many primary sources not only exist, but exist in a form easily accessible and understandable to many scholars. In addition to being widely acknowledged as one of the greatest pianists in history, he was also a noted composer, conductor and teacher.

History remembers Liszt primarily for his piano and orchestra compositions, but he also wrote for other genres: oratorios, concerti, choral music, chamber music, a one act opera, and songs. This document will examine a very narrow aspect of Liszt‘s large output: four of Liszt‘s high voice, Italian songs, Angiolin dal biondo crin and Tre sonetti di Petrarca.1

The details surrounding the composition of these songs are sketchy, at best.

While most biographers and historians place the compositional dates in an 1838-1839

1 There is a fourth, Italian language song, La perla, which was written in 1868 in Rome. That date places it at least 25 years later than 'Angiolin' and the Petrach sonnets. In addition, this song reveals different influences that do not fit within the scope of this project, therefore it has been omitted from this document.

window, the specifics beyond that time frame are lacking. Liszt did not assist us; he provided two different reports of the time and circumstance of these compositions. To compound matters, he gave these varying accounts to the same biographer! In one telling, Liszt reported that Angiolin dal biondo crin was his first song and was written for his daughter Blandine, but he later reported that Die Loreley and Mignon were first.2

With that caveat, what follows are the facts we do know. The first versions of these songs were written at some point in the years 1838-42 while Liszt and his mistress,

Countess Marie d‘Agoult, were sojourning in Italy. Even though the sonnets were greatly revised for low voice in 1883, as well as a low-voice transposition in 1865, the first version that Liszt originally published sometime between 1842 and 1846 is the version used in most modern performances.

The problem with these songs only begins with pinning down their dates. Even though they have been performed more regularly in recent years, their discussion in scholarly settings is surprisingly scarce. Liszt‘s songs, in general, receive far less attention and critical study than his other works. Certainly some disparity is understandable considering the historical importance of his orchestral and piano pieces, but even within the discussion of his songs these Italian pieces are hardly mentioned.

Some of the older books on Liszt, (such as the biography by Huneker, which devotes 3 of

442 pages to his songs), make only one passing reference to the Italian songs.3 Searle‘s

2 Alan Walker, Franz Liszt: The Weimar Years (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1989), 502.

3 James Huneker, Franz Liszt (New York: C. Scribner's Sons, 1911), 165-7.

book, The Music of Liszt, dedicates a few more pages to Liszt‘s songs, but not many.4

The biography by Norman Seroff hardly mentions Liszt‘s song output, only devoting material on two pages, one sentence per page, and passing references at that.5

Contemporary biographies pay more attention to Liszt‘s songs, but not significantly more consideration to his Italian songs. Alan Walker, a leading Liszt scholar, has written a biography, breaking up Liszt‘s life into three volumes. These three volumes total 1600 pages, yet only 20 pages or so are devoted to Liszt‘s songs. Walker acknowledges this omission in his subsequent book, Reflections on Liszt, a book written because in his 1600 page tome he still desired to, ―pursue certain topics that had to be glossed over in the course of publishing my three-volume life of Franz Liszt.‖6 In Ben Arnold‘s collection of articles entitled The Liszt Companion, chapter 15 is devoted to Liszt‘s ‗Songs and

Melodramas.‘ This chapter addresses the absence of Liszt‘s songs from the literature.

―While his songs are frequently mentioned in Lisztian studies, no book-length study about them has ever been written in English and serious studies of his songs rarely appear in general histories of song. As late as 1991 Michael Saffle [in Franz Liszt: A Guide to

Research] wrote: ‗No comparable portion of Liszt‘s compositional output has received less attention from scholars than his songs and recitations for solo voice, some of which

4 Humphrey Searle, The Music of Liszt (New York: Dover Publications, 1966), 29, 30-32, 49.

5 Victor Seroff, Franz Liszt (New York, NY: Books for Libraries Press, 1970), 59, 100.

6 Alan Walker, Reflections on Liszt (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1995), xii.

rank among the finest works of their kind.‖7,8 This 35 page article devotes most of its attention to his German lieder; the only mention of the Petrarch sonnets is to demonstrate the author‘s view that Liszt‘s song revisions often made the songs worse rather than improving upon them.

This pervasive neglect begs the question why? It is the contention of this document that a misunderstanding of these particular songs has lead to the limited attention they receive from scholars and performers.

7 Ben Arnold, "Songs and Melodramas," in The Liszt Companion, ed. Arnold, Ben (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2002), 403.

8 Michael Saffle, Franz Liszt: A Guide to Research (New York: Garland, 1991), 307.

CHAPTER II

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Though Liszt was of Hungarian birth, he grew up in a portion of Hungary that was German speaking.9 Liszt‘s musical skill became apparent at a very young age, and through his father‘s arrangement he became a piano pupil of Carl Czerny in Vienna in

1821 at 10 years of age.10 Liszt, with his father‘s help, went on to perform in many

European cities, including Vienna and London, followed by tours of France and

Switzerland, all of which occurred by the age of 16. During Liszt‘s time in France, that tongue became his preferred language. His father died in 1827, leaving him the sole support for his mother and sister. This traumatic event caused a massive shift in career planning, and as many do, he resorted to teaching to keep the family afloat. In 1828, he fell in love with Caroline de Saint-Cricq, a pupil. The failure of this relationship, due to the disapproval of her parents and the death of his father, contributed to Liszt‘s nervous breakdown in 1829. This breakdown subsequently resulted in Liszt‘s disappearance from

9 Alan Walker, Maria Eckhardt, Rena Chernin Mueller, "Franz Liszt," Grove Music Online, ed. L. Macy http://www.grovemusic.com.proxy.libraries.uc.edu/ (accessed 23 February, 2007).

10 Sacheverell Sitwell, "Liszt Timeline," in Reflections on Liszt, ed. Alan Walker (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2005).

the stage; this absence created a false ―obituary‖ in the French newspaper, L’Étoile, which stated, ―Franz Liszt, born Raiding, 1811, died Paris, 1828.‖11

After his ―resurrection,‖ Liszt traveled and met Berlioz, heard Paganini and

Chopin, and was deeply moved by these experiences. These musical influences are widely believed to have led to an artistic ―reawakening‖ for Liszt, as Sitwell describes it.12 Shortly after this renewal, Liszt made an acquaintance that profoundly affected the rest of his life: Countess Marie d‘Agoult. Author George Sand introduced the two in

1834, and not allowing an existing marriage to Comte Charles d‘Agoult to act as a deterrent, Liszt and the countess fell helplessly in love.13 Within a year of their meeting, they eloped to Switzerland, and their first daughter, Blandine, was born. In 1837 they traveled to Italy, where Liszt composed the Petrarch Sonnets, and by 1839 Liszt began a period described by scholars as his ―years of transcendental execution.‖14

In the years immediately following 1839, Liszt undertook a performing career that is truly remarkable. Between the years 1839-47, Liszt traveled Europe, giving numerous concerts, and it is in this time period that Liszt created the image we frequently see; a performer with throngs of fans and adorers treating him somewhat akin to the Beatles.

During these years, despite having three children together, Liszt‘s relationship with

11 Seroff, 19.

12 Sitwell, 366.

13 Alan Walker, Franz Liszt: The Man and His Music (New York: Taplinger Publishing Company, 1979), 371.

14 Ibid, 285.

Countess D‘Agoult fell apart. Liszt moved on to a new love and a new locale. In 1847 he made the acquaintance of Caroline von Wittgenstein, who shortly thereafter became his new mistress. In 1848, Liszt moved to Weimar, where he became the Kapellmeister- in-Extraordinary. These years formed Liszt‘s historical posterity as a composer and musical philosopher. In the ―War of the Romantics,‖ Liszt chose sides with Berlioz and

Wagner, and in this dispute was pitted against Schumann, Brahms, and Mendelssohn.

In a gross oversimplification, the disagreement involved what was to become of sonata form; those from Leipzig (Schumann, Brahms, and Mendelssohn) wanted to preserve the form, whereas the composers associated with Weimar (Liszt, Berlioz and

Wagner) wished to adapt and modify it. This division, regardless of to what degree it actually existed, has affected the way we look at Liszt‘s compositional output. His formation of the Neu-Weimar-Verein, a group of musicians devoted to the advocacy of new music, led to the development of the New German School, as the term was coined in

1859. Liszt became a prominent figure in the development of new music. He had a strong platform from which to accomplish this task, since the Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, under the editorial guidance of Franz Brendel, had become a publication sympathetic to the opinions and music of Liszt and his colleagues.15 After resigning from his post at

Weimer, Liszt then went to Rome in 1859. While in Rome he took the lower orders of the Roman Catholic Church. From 1869 forward, Liszt spent his remaining years divided between Rome, Weimar, and Budapest, primarily as a teacher.

15 Walker, Franz Liszt: The Weimar Years, 348-9.

CHAPTER III

COMMON HISTORICAL INTERPRETATIONS OF LISZT

Now that a broad overview of Liszt‘s life has been established, one must examine how history generally interprets those events. This will be a basic survey of the current interpretations of Liszt‘s biography and the conclusions drawn by his biographers, and not an attempt to cover all the ground previously covered by historians. This is, without doubt, a difficult undertaking; Liszt‘s biographies number into the dozens, and the historical analyses of his life and works number nearly as many. This enterprise, however difficult, is an essential step in solving the problem that confronts us. Without understanding the views and beliefs of Liszt scholars, it would be difficult to accurately identify the reasons why Liszt‘s Italian songs are absent from much of that study.

People in modern life are often judged by their friends and enemies, and the field of musicology is not different. For example, while much of our knowledge regarding the life of a specific historical figure comes from reading his or her personal writings (both public and private), we often measure that information against what others have said and written about our subject of study, or perhaps by reading the correspondence between the subject and his or her friends, family, colleagues, and even his or her enemies. Such a method is one of the many techniques employed in the study of Liszt.

One person with whom Liszt is associated was perhaps the most significant musical figure of the mid-19th century, Richard Wagner. Furthermore, Liszt historians

have established a significant, well chronicled link between the two composers. The connection is established in two ways. First, historians look at Liszt and Wagner's personal association as friends. Second, their professional connection demonstrates the compositional effect they had on one another. Considering what became a relationship that lasted decades, it is curious that their relationship began so roughly, with Liszt stating in a letter to Christian Friedrich Meser, a German music publisher, in 1843,

―Should you see Wagner (who, I am told, I do not know why, harbors a shocking opinion of me), tell him that I am really sorry that I have not heard any of his much discussed operas and that if we might meet, it would please me to get to know him further on personal, musical and spiritual level.‖16 Twenty seven years later, Liszt became

Wagner‘s father-in-law through Wagner‘s marriage to Liszt‘s daughter, Cosima. In the intervening years, their alliance went through times of close association and times of great alienation.

Liszt heard a performance of Rienzi in Dresden in 1844; he immediately decided to perform a Wagner opera at Weimar when he assumed his full duties there. Liszt followed through on that more than once, beginning with his production of Tannhäuser in

1849.17 After the Dresden insurrection, Liszt also provided safe haven in Weimar to

Wagner, who was attempting to escape from pursuing authorities. Liszt‘s involvement in

Wagner‘s escape went far beyond simply providing a clean bed. Liszt loaned Wagner

16 Short, Michael, Franz Liszt Study Series, ed. Michael Saffle, Liszt Letters in the Library of Congress (Hillsdale, NY: Pendragon Press, 2003), 30-31.

17 Walker, Franz Liszt: The Weimar Years 112-113, 502.

money for his escape to Switzerland (money provided by Princess Carolyn), and after writing to enlist help from friends in other cities, he snuck Wagner out of Weimar while

Wagner was hidden in a box.18

While they were already acquainted prior to this incident, the appreciation and support for each other‘s music began to deepen after this distressing event. Later, referencing the period after the Dresden insurrection, Liszt stated, ―Since Wagner had so valiantly broken new ground and created such wonderful masterpieces, my first concern had to be to establish firm roots for these masterpieces in German soil—at a time when he himself was exiled from his homeland and when all the theatres in Germany, both great and small, were afraid to risk his name on the playbill.‖19 In personal correspondence, Wagner claimed to hold Liszt in great esteem, stating, ―I feel thoroughly contemptible as a musician, whereas you, as I have now convinced myself, are the greatest musician of all times.‖20 Historians cast doubt on the veracity of that statement, noting that Wagner‘s side of that friendship involved frequently requesting money and performance opportunity from Liszt. Wagner, regardless of how he felt about it, did acknowledge Liszt‘s influence on the development of Wagner‘s use of harmony.21

18 Adrian Williams, Portrait of Liszt: By Himself and His Contemporaries (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1990), 253-4.

19 Liszt, Franz and La Mara, Franz Liszts Briefe: Briefe an eine Freundin (Leipzig: Breitkopf und Härtel, 1894), 136-7.

20 Huneker, 103.

21 Walker, Franz Liszt: The Weimar Years, 544-546.

A survey of Liszt biographies shows a universal acknowledgement of this mutual support and respect between Liszt and Wagner. Their association went beyond simple friendship and affection, though, and moved into the realm of professional support. As implied in the previous Liszt quote, Liszt became an essential supporter of Wagner‘s work. With his position at Weimar, Liszt was able to do what few others wished to do at that time in Germany—give voice to Wagner‘s operas. Following Liszt‘s production of

Tannhäuser in 1840, he then committed great resources to a production of Lohengrin at

Weimar in 1850, including an unprecedented 46 rehearsals.22

One of the reasons Liszt offered his support to Wagner was because not only were they friends, but their views on musical aesthetics were quite similar. In fact, there were notable differences in their personalities. At the forefront of their difficulties were their religious differences. Wagner was staunchly atheist and had a renowned disdain for the

God of Christendom, while Liszt was a devout Catholic whose belief that music was divinely inspired caused great tension between himself and Wagner. However, their overlapping views and interests usually helped them overcome their differences. Liszt‘s influence upon Wagner‘s use of harmony was widely acknowledged at the time, even by

Wagner himself. Liszt also acknowledged Wagner‘s influence on his own composition, inscribing Wagner‘s copy of Liszt‘s Dante Symphony with the words, ―As Virgil guided

Dante, so have you guided me through the mysterious regions of the life-imbued worlds

22 Leonhard Schrickel, Geschichte des Weimarer Theaters von seinen Anfängen bis heute (Weimar: Panses Verlag, 1928), 197.

of tone…‖23 This symbiotic influence applied not only to their compositions, but also to their prose writing. Lina Ramann draws several parallels in her biography of Liszt, even as early as 1882, between his six 1835 essays in the ―Gazette Musicale de Paris‖ and

Wagner‘s 1849 ―Kunst und Revolution.‖24

This shared influence is perhaps best seen by Liszt and Wagner‘s ‗membership‘ in the ―New German School,‖ a term coined in 1859 by Franz Brendel to describe the compositions and philosophy of Liszt, Berlioz, and Wagner.25 One of the results of this grouping is that this view of Liszt as a progressive voice in the 19th century has intensified, specifically in the areas of tonality and form, and he frequently is thrust upon the heroic pedestal of progressive ideology with a rhetorical shove, and not a gentle nudge. One can often find passages such as this in Lisztian studies: ―Through Liszt‘s overcoming all known pianistic difficulties and creating a new autobiographical type of composition, Liszt was stretching the boundaries of piano music and music itself. His autobiographical and virtuosic model changed the idea of what music was and could be.

He created a revolution in the way music was created and the reasons it was created.

23 Walker, Franz Liszt: The Weimar Years , 546.

24 Lina Ramann, Franz Liszt: Artist and Man (London: W.H. Allen and Co, 1882), 126-7.

25 Mary Sue Morrow, "Deconstructing Brendel's 'New German' Liszt," in Liszt and the Birth of Modern Europe: Music As a Mirror of Religious, Political, Cultural, and Aesthetic Transformations : Proceedings of the International Conference Held at the Villa Serbelloni, Bellagio (Como) 14-18 December 1998. Franz Liszt Study Series No. 9, ed. Michael Saffle, and Rossana Dalmonte (Hillsdale, NY: Pendragon Press, 2003), 157.

Liszt was not just writing program music, but radically personalizing and changing the nature and definition of music.‖26

This view of Liszt as progressive includes his attitudes toward tonality and form, but, as this excerpt indicates, also his advancement of program music. Liszt‘s piano and instrumental works certainly demonstrate these ideas. Some scholars contend that the entirety of Liszt‘s musical output was, at a minimum, somewhat programmatic. This view is espoused by Klára Hamburger, when she writes, ―In point of fact, Liszt wrote program music throughout his life…irrespective of whether he was specifically

‗portraying‘ a chosen subject in his music…This applies to his whole life‘s work, which cannot be divided up and categorized artificially with respect to programmatic composition. It applies as much to his sacred as to his secular music, to his instrumental as to his vocal settings, to the numerous genres in which he composed, and to the various phases of his stylistic development.‖ 27 This view of Liszt may lie toward the extreme of modern scholarship, but, at a minimum, the traditional narrative includes much of Liszt‘s piano music and his symphonic poems as programmatic. By seeing Liszt as a leading progressive voice, he effectively becomes German, since the New German School was the leading progressive voice in compositional aesthetics.

26 Ben Arnold, "Franz Liszt: An Autobiographical and Virtuosic Revolution," in Liszt the Progressive, ed. Hans Kagebeck and Johan Lagerfelt (Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press, 2001), 6.

27 Klara Hamburger, "Program and the Hungarian Idiom in the Sacred Music of Liszt," in New Light on Liszt and His Music: Essays in Honor of Alan Walker’s 65th Birthday. Franz Liszt Study Series No. 6, ed. Alan Walker, Michael Saffle and James Deaville (Stuyvesant, NY: Pendragon Press, 1997), 239.

In addition to seeing Liszt as a standard-bearer for progressive philosophy, historians often view Liszt as a primarily German composer with a secondary French influence. Most articles that address Liszt‘s nationality as a composer acknowledge

French was his preferred tongue; they also acknowledge his strong, personal ties to

Hungary, and his years traveling about Europe. Even though these mitigating factors are widely accepted, most analysis sees his musical language as primarily German and secondarily as French.

Proponents of this German view, of course, have several pieces of evidence beyond Liszt‘s association with Wagner and the New German School. German was

Liszt‘s first language, and he later came to prefer French after spending significant amounts of time in Paris. Of course, the New German School of composers is called such for a reason, although some more recent scholarship acknowledges both that there is a French influence within the New German School and that the appellation says more about the agendas of those giving it the name than it does about those who bore the name.28

Furthermore, Liszt composed a great deal of music in traditionally German genres—piano and orchestral works. Liszt even saw himself as a continuation of the orchestral tradition of Beethoven.29 Additionally, Liszt was a known performer of

Beethoven and Schubert, as noted by Christopher H. Gibbs, ―Liszt also became

28 Morrow, 164.

29 Reeves Shulstad, "Liszt's Symphonic Poems," in The Cambridge Companion to Liszt, ed. Kenneth Hamilton (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 206.

increasingly engaged with the music of Beethoven and Schubert. He had performed

Beethoven sonatas and chamber music while concertizing in Paris, and he also accompanied singers in Schubert songs. In the year or so before coming to Vienna, Liszt had put much of his energies into transcribing Beethoven symphonies and Schubert songs.‖30 This involvement with the music of these Germanic composers, as historians tell us, is evidence of Liszt‘s Germanic nature. As time progressed and Liszt moved to

Weimar, he experienced his most significant years as a composer of piano and orchestral music. This period includes the composition of most of his symphonic poems and his

Piano Sonata in b minor.31 These two genres are held by historians as two of his most significant areas of composition. He continued his song transcriptions by adapting 52

Schubert songs during his Weimar years, the largest number of songs from any one composer that Liszt transcribed.32

Perhaps at the heart of this German perception of Liszt is the legendary location of much of his compositional career, Weimar. Weimar was the site for several festivals that promoted new and progressive music, and these concerts were usually organized by

Liszt during his time as Kapellmeister there. This position of influence allowed Liszt to express his German preference, largely by programming works from composers of the

30 Christopher H. Gibbs, "Just Two Words. Enormous Success," in Franz Liszt and His World, ed. Christopher Gibbs and Dana Gooley (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006), 179.

31 Ben Arnold, "Piano Music: 1835-1861." in The Liszt Companion, ed. Arnold, Ben (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2002), 74.

32 Ibid, 133.

New German School. For example, Liszt scheduled two ―Berlioz weeks‖ while at

Weimar, which was a large step considering Berlioz‘s lack of support in France, as well as performances of Wagner‘s operas and a ―Wagner festival.‖33

In addition to his work at Weimar, this German reading of Liszt is fueled by his connection with the German press. At first, Liszt was seen by the German press as a virtuosic performer. While treated as a prodigy (and possibly a passing novelty) as a young performer, as he grew into maturity he found many friends among critics in the

German language press by the 1840s.34 Liszt‘s students, Joachim Raff and Hans von

Bülow, began writing for local papers and eventually the Neue Zeitschrift für Musik after they arrived at Weimar. Liszt himself became an active figure in the musical press, writing books on the Goethe Foundation and Chopin, followed by a string of articles for the Neue Zeitschrift. These articles began his written involvement in the ―War of the

Romantics.‖ Liszt took a less active role in the press war of the 1850s, but by then it was too late: he had been identified with the progressive side of the German musical struggle, along with Wagner, Berlioz and the Neue Zeitschrift, and in opposition to the conservative voices of Mendelssohn, Schumann, Brahms, and the Niederrheinische

Musik-Zeitung.35 By becoming entwined in a German disagreement, Liszt provided substantial evidence of his German identity.

33 Walker, Franz Liszt: The Weimar Years 161-2.

34 Michael Saffle, Liszt in Germany, 1840-1845 : a study in sources, documents, and the history of reception (Stuyvesant, NY: Pendragon Press, 1994), 203.

35 James Deaville, "Liszt in the German-Language Press," in The Liszt Companion, ed. Ben Arnold (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2002), 41-49.

To summarize this typical narrative, Liszt, while from a cosmopolitan origin, is oriented in a basically German direction. He was close personal friends with the leading

German composer of the mid-19th century and they were allies in compositional progressivism. They each admitted that they had greatly influenced the compositional style of the other. Liszt was the Kapellmeister at the court most associated with

―German‖ music in the 19th century. Particularly during Liszt‘s years at that court, he wrote in genres typically associated with German music; symphonies, symphonic works, piano works, and many lieder.

This view appears to be perfectly rational, with a great deal of evidence and widespread support. However, as is about to become clear, this oversimplified view allows little room for nuance or complexity. In fact, most Liszt scholars would point to their constant acknowledgement of Liszt‘s connection with other lands and tongues, his many travels through Europe and his popularity across the continent. However, on balance, the study of Liszt passes his music through a German filter, and, as will be seen in the next chapter, this sieve affects the reception of nearly every facet of Liszt‘s music.

In recent years, cracks have begun to appear in this standard description of Liszt; scholars have begun to see other components to the compositional personality of Liszt. These chinks in the established understanding of Liszt have not yet, however, found their way into the understanding of his song literature. It is clear that the German understanding of

Liszt affects both the contemporary study of his songs and, in at least some cases, it does not adequately address the finer features of Liszt‘s compositional style.

CHAPTER IV

IMPACT OF COMMON HISTORICAL INTERPRETATIONS

Now that the general interpretation of Liszt as German has been established, one must search for the potential effects of this interpretation. While there are several factors that affect the modern reception of a composer and his works, most of which will be discussed later, the standard view of historians is perhaps the most important. What is believed about a composer subtly and profoundly influences how new information on the original subject is received. This problem, though, can resemble the debate about chicken and the egg. Are works performed and studied because the composers are studied first? Or are composers examined because their works are widely researched and performed? Is Mozart performed and viewed as a genius because his works are often heard and picked apart, or does the widespread performance of his works lead to the academic devotion to his biography? One might imagine that this is a false dichotomy; rather than being faced with an either/or proposition, the reality may be a continuum where both questions may be answered ‗yes‘ to varying degrees at different times.

Thankfully, though, that dilemma does not require an answer to accurately examine the effect of historical reception of Liszt upon the study and performance of his works. If, in fact, Liszt is viewed by history as predominantly Germanic, then that identification must have a deep effect upon how modern scholars approach Liszt. After examining several

factors, one cannot help but conclude that the German interpretation of Liszt by historians has a profound and negative influence upon the study and reception of his Italian songs.

Perhaps the first place to look for this effect is in the music history texts from which all music students learn their ‗basics‘. While these texts are not designed to go into great detail, they do begin to form first impressions of composers and their works in the minds of young musicians. In that respect, these texts are germane to this discussion.

In Grout and Palisca‘s History of Western Music, Liszt‘s songs do not even garner a single word, while the music in his more ‗German‘ genres (piano and orchestral) rates roughly six and five pages respectively.36 In K. Marie Stolba‘s The Development of

Western Music, her section on Liszt does indeed include Liszt‘s songs. If fact, there is even a mention of the Petrarch sonnets and their two versions. This solitary paragraph on

Liszt‘s songs, however, hardly compares to the entire page devoted to his orchestral music and the page and a half devoted to his keyboard music. Stolba‘s mention of Liszt certainly is more significant than Grout‘s outright omission of Liszt‘s songs, but it does not enter into the extended discussion that the piano and orchestral works receive.37

This observation does not prove some sort of conspiracy by musicologists to make Liszt into a German in spite of existing evidence, nor is it intended to. It also does

36 Donald Jay Grout and Claude V. Palisca, A History of Western Music, 6th ed. ed. (New York: W.W. Norton and Co, 2001), 542-602. Incidentally, some vocal music of Liszt is discussed in this section of the text. His larger, sacred choral works, such as the Festival Mass and Via Crucis, are discussed. Interestingly, Via Crucis is included because of its experimental use of harmony, thus tying it to the ―New German School‖.

37 K. Marie Stolba, The Development of Western Music, 3rd ed. (Boston: The McGraw Hill Companies, 1998), 507-511.

not contend that it is somehow unfair or unjust to spend so little time on Liszt‘s songs, nor does it even prove that these texts have any direct effect on the lack of present day attention paid to Liszt‘s Italian songs. Furthermore, it does not attempt to disprove that

Liszt, in many ways, is a German composer. This observation does, however, provide a good starting point for the discussion.

For decades, Liszt‘s songs received scant attention in biographies of his life. As mentioned in the introductory chapter, some of the older books on Liszt make only the slightest references to Liszt‘s Italian songs, or even his songs in general. Contemporary biographies pay more attention to Liszt‘s songs, but not significantly more attention to his

Italian songs. Closer examination, however, of the discussion of Liszt's songs within these books will indeed demonstrate how prevalent and pronounced this German view of the composer is. When Liszt‘s songs are studied beyond a mere passing reference, the effects of this Germanic interpretation become clear.

To begin the search, one such place to look is in the book Reflections on Liszt by

Alan Walker. As noted before, this book was compiled by Walker to address the omission of Liszt‘s songs from serious discussion in his 1600 page, three-volume biography entitled Franz Liszt. In the prologue, Walker states that he wanted to cover subject matters he had previously ―glossed over,‖ and he specifically mentions the lied as one of those areas.38 Of course, by choosing the term lied, Walker either is referring to all of Liszt‘s songs with a German name, or inadvertently tilting the discussion toward the direction of Germany.

38 Alan Walker, Reflections on Liszt, xii.

Walker refers to Liszt‘s Petrarch Sonnets as early song attempts, but states that

Liszt did not enter maturity as a song composer until his Weimar years. He then makes an interesting claim: ―The songs are strangely neglected today. They rarely turn up in the modern Lieder recital, and some of them are unknown even to specialists. This is surprising, for a closer acquaintance with the best of them suggests that they represent a

‗missing link‘ between Schumann and Mahler. In fact, the history of the German Lied is incomplete without taking Liszt into account.‖ Walker lays out an excellent case; Liszt‘s first language was German, although Walker admits in a footnote that French was Liszt‘s preferred language, Liszt lived in the city of Goethe and Schiller, and Liszt set numerous well-regarded, German poems. Add to it Liszt‘s piano transcriptions of Schubert,

Schumann, and Mendelssohn, and Liszt, and Liszt was clearly a Lieder composer of great consequence. 39

Walker spends the balance of the chapter surveying various Liszt songs, all

German, and analyzing their Germanic qualities. In fact, Walker spends a significant amount of time defending Liszt against charges that his songs often have poor settings of text; Walker claims that ultimately every time poetry is set to music, the music dominates the text. Therefore, Walker argues, ―music, in brief, casts its defining mantle over everything it touches. That is why we must judge Liszt, as we would judge any other lieder composer, on the quality of his musical material.‖40 He continues, at various points in the chapter, to address this text-setting concern, raising valid points along the

39 Ibid, 150-151.

40 Ibid, 158.

way. But the ultimate point he makes is that all text settings distort the source poem; it is only a matter of degree. While this may in fact be true, it is clear that Walker is eager to silence any argument that might weaken the view of Liszt at German. Coupled with

Walker‘s avoidance of anything but a slight mention of Liszt‘s songs written in other languages, not only are the effects of a Germanic view of Liszt quite clear, Walker seems to be doing everything rhetorically possible to advocate in favor of that view.41

The chapter entitled ‗Liszt‘s Lieder‘ by Monika Hennemann in The Cambridge

Companion to Liszt is an additional contemporary article on Liszt‘s songs. This text is written with a more objective tone than Walker, and rather than making a case for Liszt,

Hennemann briefly covers many of the basic areas necessary for an understanding of the majority of Liszt‘s song compositions. She gives a brief overview of the accepted strong and weak points of Liszt‘s songs, then deals with the areas of ‗Language and text,‘

‗Musical features,‘ ‗Revisions,‘ and ‗Piano transcriptions.‘ In this ‗just the facts‘ style of writing the influences of the perception of Liszt as German are still present, albeit more subtly than in the writing of Walker.

Hennemann begins, of course, by referring to Liszt‘s songs as ‗Liszt‘s Lieder,‘ the same term that Walker used to indicate a treatment that would clearly be focused on the

German songs of Liszt only. The implication of the terminology used holds true for

Hennemann as well. The opening of her chapter acknowledges what all authors seem to identify—a somewhat mysterious neglect of Liszt‘s songs, both from study and

41 On page 160, Walker states that there are only four Italian language songs of Liszt. There clearly are five; Tre sonetti di Petrarca, Angiolin dal biondo crin, and La perla. The reason for the omission is uncertain.

performance.42 She then points out a complaint that is frequently laid out against Liszt‘s

German songs, and is also acknowledged by Walker: ―Although complaints about aspects of Liszt‘s musical declamation persist to this day…owing in part to the aspect that

Hueffer disliked – their more extrovert, operatic quality allows the singer to dramatise a variety of moods and emotions in the confines of one song.‖43 In fact, this quality fueled

Liszt‘s critics of the time. ―To those of Liszt‘s contemporaries who believed that an essential feature of the Lied was simplicity…his more ambitious settings undermined the very nature of the genre.‖44

The article gives basic, chronological information and acknowledges that Liszt wrote songs in several languages, including the Italian songs that are the focus of this document. In the section on ―Musical features,‖ Hennemann does discuss a non-German song, ‗O! quand je dors‘, but the overwhelming majority of the musical analysis in this section rests with Liszt‘s German songs, discussing Liszt‘s advanced and daring use of harmony and comparing his setting of ―Im Rhein‖ to Schumann‘s. In fact, Hennemann states, ―When a poem completely captured his [Liszt‘s] imagination, he was capable of producing such masterpieces as his revised settings of Hugo‘s ‗Oh! quand je dors‘ and

42 Monika Hennemann, Liszt's Lieder, in The Cambridge Companion to Liszt, ed. Ben Arnold (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 192.

43 Ibid, 193.

44 Ibid, 193.

Goethe‘s ‗Über allen Gipfeln ist Ruh‘.‖45 It certainly is curious that one would mention great poets and great Liszt settings without at least a small mention of Petrarch.

The next section, on revision, mentions the Petrarch Sonnets. Their presence, however, is only to discuss the inferiority of Liszt‘s late revisions of the songs, and to use them as an example to bolster the argument that most of Liszt‘s other lieder revisions were weaker than their originals. The final section, on piano transcriptions, does not pertain to the subject at hand.

While it would be foolish to argue these songs are neglected because of some conspiracy, threads of commonality are beginning to emerge. First, both authors indicate that Liszt‘s songs are not programmed as often as they should be, considering, in their estimation, the great quality of Liszt‘s songs. Second, the Italian songs are often mentioned, but only to acknowledge Liszt‘s early attempt at song. If they are discussed again, it is only to further another argument and not to discuss the songs and their historical place or their unique qualities. Finally, both chapters acknowledge a common criticism of Liszt‘s lieder: the words are not treated with the same sense of declamation as most great lieder.

The final writing under study in this chapter comes from musicologist Ben

Arnold. In his chapter on ‗Liszt‘s Songs and Melodramas‘ from The Liszt Companion

(which praises the quality of Liszt‘s songs overall), he indicates a possibly unintentional and unacknowledged Germanic view of Liszt with several statements regarding Liszt‘s songs and in the way he addresses several aspects of Liszt‘s song output. First, Arnold

45 Ibid, 199.

acknowledges the absence of Liszt‘s songs in the modern, vocal recital. He also argues that Liszt‘s best songs contend with the ―recognized masters of the nineteenth century‖,

Schubert, Schumann, and Wolf.46 He then proceeds to mention that Liszt wrote a few songs in the 1830s and 40s, but Liszt was not truly engaged in the form until after 1848.

This, of course, implies that Liszt‘s writing of the Italian songs in 1838-42 was from a less significant time, in terms of quality, than his post-1848 period. While this notion can easily be supported if the assertion is quantitative, a qualitative argument cannot be levied without some kind of support. In fact, Arnold somewhat undercuts his point by later admitting that Liszt, at least, found his Petrarch sonnets to be ―singularly successful and more finished in form than any of the other things I have published,‖ yet they then merit no serious discussion in this chapter.47 Furthermore, Arnold later praises the Petrarch sonnets, calling them ―sensuous,‖ ―melodically inventive,‖ and ―virtuosic.‖48

Lest one believe, however, that this acknowledgement signals a probing analysis of these sonnets, it does not. While Arnold devotes more pages of text to the vocal versions of the sonnets than any other contemporary author, they only appear in this section of his chapter to further his discussion of Liszt‘s song revisions. In fairness, and this is where this discussion becomes awkward, Arnold does begin to acknowledge the operatic nature of these Italian songs, or at least the Petrarch sonnets. He begins by mentioning that, ―Liszt‘s innovations in his songs range from their operatic nature,

46 Ben Arnold, "Songs and Melodramas," in The Liszt Companion, 403.

47 Ibid, 405.

48 Ibid, 416-418.

advanced harmonic language, formal experimentation, and virtuosic vocal and piano writing to the declamatory style of his late songs and his pioneering efforts in orchestral song.‖49 Notice, however, this thought does not acknowledge an Italian operatic nature, only an operatic nature, similar to the statements of Hennemann and Walker. In addition, the other characteristics that Arnold mentions are ones that have already been connected to the New German School: advanced harmony and formal experimentation. While what he is pointing out is certainly true, it is becoming clear that this is not the entire picture of

Liszt‘s song writing. Arnold goes on, though, while discussing the Petrarch sonnets and their revisions, to state that Pace non trovo, ―resembles an operatic scene with its recitative and aria format and extended range,‖ and that, ―even after the cadenza the operatic writing continues…‖50 Again, however, there is no national identity attached to this ‗operatic writing.‘ In fairness, one might argue that an Italian identity could be assumed because of the language of the text. While that is a reasonable question, Arnold goes into great detail to identify and spends a large amount of print discussing the

Germanic elements of these songs. It makes little sense to point out, in passing, one characteristic that does not fit with the rest and then to ignore that anomaly. While this explanation is certainly possible, it does not seem very plausible. It is more likely that

Arnold fails to identify the specific operatic nature of these songs, does not want to acknowledge an Italian influence, or he views this characteristic of Liszt‘s songs as he does all the others in his study: as German.

49 Ibid, 408.

50 Ibid, 416, 418.

Since it has been establish that Arnold, unlike many of his peers, at least acknowledges Liszt‘s Italian songs in his analysis of Liszt‘s song composition, any criticism of Arnold can only be fair if his discussion of Liszt‘s songs shows a lack of balance or some other inequity when compared to his treatment of Liszt‘s German and

French songs. What is perhaps most striking in Arnold‘s chapter, yet difficult to demonstrate without quoting it entirely, is Arnold‘s markedly different way of handling the Italian songs from the way he treats the rest of Liszt‘s song output. Remember, the

Petrarch sonnets enter the discussion only when Arnold uses them to bolster his argument that the quality of Liszt‘s songs, while generally high, suffers greatly from

Liszt‘s revisions. The German lieder, receive a much longer discussion, and, in fact, dominate the chapter. This seems appropriate; both because Liszt‘s German lieder greatly outnumber his songs in French and Italian, but it also fits perfectly with Arnold‘s contention that Liszt really became a master of song composition after 1848.

Furthermore, there is a marked difference in how they are treated; the Petrarch Sonnets are evidence in an argument, while the German songs are discussed on their own merits and qualities.

To bolster the argument that Liszt did not reach maturity as a song composer until

1848, Arnold gives an overview of Liszt‘s song catalogue, explaining that the majority of songs are in German and French, and discusses both the prominent and the minor poets that Liszt set in each language. In discussing the French songs, Arnold cites Fritz Noske and David Cox, who both contend that Liszt‘s French songs are not French at all, but rather they are German. Arnold admits one ‗dissenting‘ voice, Charles Osborne, who

claims that Liszt‘s French songs also sound German…except for one.51 Arnold acknowledges that Liszt wrote several songs in other languages, including Hungarian,

Italian, English and Russian. Then follows this ironic statement, ―Except for the

Petrarch Sonnets, none of these [non-German and non-French] songs is performed often today. Liszt revised each of his Italian songs, which include some of his earliest efforts at song writing. The Petrarch Sonnets, are among his most popular in their first version, although Liszt revised them and curtailed them dramatically in the 1880s.‖52 The irony here, and perhaps the greatest example of the effect of a German view of Liszt on the study of his works, is the kind of gentle derision implied by this statement; that while these songs are the most popular of Liszt‘s songs, they were written before Liszt reached his full potential as a song composer. They certainly are not like his mature works, the songs written after 1848, when he was a good song composer. What happened in 1848, then, to Liszt to usher him into this new era of composition? This date, in fact, is mentioned by all three authors as the time when Liszt entered his mature period of song composition. The watershed moment, of course, is that in 1848 Liszt moved to Weimar, the birthplace of his most ‗Germanic‘ period.

After surveying three modern writings on Liszt‘s songs, common trends and points of agreement are beginning to emerge. Each chapter acknowledges that Liszt‘s

51 Ibid, 407. Arnold quotes the following books in this passage: Fris Noske, French Song from Berlioz to Duparc, trans. Rita Benton (New York: Dover, 1970), 126; Charles Osborne, The Concert Song Companion: A Guide to the Classical Repertoire (London: Victor Gollancz, 1974), 59; and David Cox, "France" in The History of Song, ed. Dennis Stevens, rev. ed. (New York and London: W.W. Norton, 1970), 202.

52 Ibid, 408.

songs are not performed as often as they merit, and all express confusion and frustration regarding their absence. Second, in terms of content, each chapter exhibits a heavy tilt towards Liszt‘s German songs. Since most of Liszt‘s songs set German texts, this is somewhat reasonable. What seems odd, however, is the complete lack of discussion of

Liszt‘s Petrarch Sonnets, other than brief mentions of their existence in a timeline, or their usage to further another point, such as the weakness of Liszt‘s song revisions. Since these writings mention these songs exist and often discuss the piano versions, the omission of the Italian songs from any study as songs alone, and not just support for a different argument, appears odd. Each article also acknowledges an operatic quality to the songs, and Hennemann points out that this was often a quality that German contemporaries of Liszt found distasteful and decidedly foreign. Furthermore, all three authors address the common attack on Liszt as a poor setter of text. Walker, in particular, seems to take umbrage at this point, and he and Arnold attempt to defend Liszt from this charge. Finally, all three claim that Liszt‘s finest years as a song composer were at

Weimar.

This final statement bears close examination. Do Arnold and the others have a point? Are Liszt‘s pre-1848 songs simply immature creative outbursts that do not deserve much serious study? Or has a misunderstanding of these early, Italian songs, prevented scholars and performers from having an accurate and full appreciation of what these songs truly are? If they are German in nature, then Arnold et al are correct. With the German view, however, certain questions arise. Does a German view of these songs explain their ‗operatic quality‘ that was foreign to lieder? And if the German songs

sounded operatic, do the Italian songs not sound even more operatic? If they are indeed

Italianate, then a new view should enlighten future study of these songs, and it may also answer some of the concerns that these authors began to raise. But, of course, one cannot argue for an Italian view without significant evidence.

CHAPTER V

HISTORICAL SUPPORT FOR AN ITALIAN PERSPECTIVE

Before one can truly examine the idea that Liszt exhibits an Italian identity in his

Italian language songs, one must search Liszt‘s biography to see if there is any historical basis for this claim. In other words, before one goes through the chore of examining

Liszt‘s songs for evidence of an Italian presence, it would make sense that he or she should search through Liszt‘s history for events and people that would make such an influence understandable. Liszt‘s pre-Weimar biography contains plenty of evidence to support, at least, the opportunity for an Italian musical character in Liszt‘s Italian language songs.

Franz Liszt went on his first ―world‖ tour in 1823 with his father, Adam, at the age of 12. There is much about these Liszt years that remains unknown. Ramann‘s biography of Liszt includes precious little about his Paris years due to the lack of first- hand documents. Later biographers experienced similar difficulties. While his 12 years of off-and-on residence in Paris clearly formed and influenced Liszt, he had experiences within these Paris years that begin to point to an Italianate nature within his compositional style.

The Liszts arrived in Paris in December of 1823, and after being denied acceptance to the Paris Conservatory, Franz began studying composition with Ferdinando

Paer. Paer, Liszt's first composition teacher, was born in Parma, Italy. After a compositional career path that went through Vienna and Dresden, Paer became

Napoleon's maître de chapelle. Then, in 1812, Paer took charge of Paris‘ Theâtre Italien, where he remained in charge until 1827. This was the longest tenure at one post in his entire career, and where he left his mark on history--as a composer of Italian-style opera.

As Walker states, ―By the time of his death, in 1839, he [Paer] felt overshadowed by

Rossini; but posterity has assigned him a lasting, if modest, place in the history of opera.‖53 From an early point in Liszt's compositional training, then, Italianate style had a place in Liszt's life. While Liszt had previously studied piano with Czerny and theory with Salieri, Paer was Liszt‘s first composition teacher. While this anecdote does not demonstrate that Paer forced an Italianate style upon Liszt, it does function as the first piece of anecdotal evidence in a compelling case.

In the available information on Liszt from this period, we have several stories that confirm Liszt had several encounters with bel canto opera during his pre-Weimar years.

The first comes from Liszt‘s earliest trip to England in 1824. Liszt offered a performance in London, now at age 13, attended by Clement, Cramer, Ries, and Kalkbrenner. As

Walker retells, ―Sir George Scott conducted the orchestra, and, as so often before, the chief work was Hummel‘s B-minor Concerto. According to the Morning Post, Sir

George begged the audience for a theme on which ‗Master Liszt could work.‘ After a long pause, a lady called out ‗Zitti, zitti,‘ from Rossini‘s Barber of Seville, and the young

53 Alan Walker, Franz Liszt: The Early Years (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1983), 95.

virtuoso at once improvised a fugue on this melody.‖54 Beyond the potential influence of his composition teacher, a fairly young Liszt must therefore have also been familiar with the style of music written by his composition teacher‘s primary rival.

Liszt‘s father, Adam, died in August of 1827. This tragic event ushered in a dark period in Liszt‘s life; in addition to the emotional difficulties it caused, Franz also became solely responsible for the care of his mother. Not only did Liszt pull away from his performing schedule, he took on greater teaching responsibilities to fill the income gap left by his father‘s death and the uncertainty of performing revenue. Liszt fell into depression, and in the years 1827-29 he did not publish a single composition.55 While emerging from this period of difficulty, Liszt began to find his way to the opera house.

An awareness of Italian opera during his Paris years has already been established, but additional evidence supports a continuing education in bel canto style. ―During the winter of 1829-30 he [Liszt] saw Rossini‘s Guillaume Tell, whose hero he admired for his individual struggle against tyrannical oppression.‖56

While Liszt clearly had exposure to Italian opera in Paris, his years of most direct and significant exposure are the years 1835-1839. This period is commonly known as

Liszt‘s ―Years of Pilgrimage.‖ Liszt spent much of this five-year period in Italy, including most of the years 1837-1839. During this period, Liszt developed a relationship with Italian music publisher Giovanni Ricordi. As reported by Liszt, while

54 Ibid, 103.

55 Ibid, 131.

56 Ibid, 138.

visiting Milan, Liszt wandered by Ricordi‘s shop. Without an introduction, Liszt seated himself at one of the pianos and began playing. ―Quest‘è Liszt o il diavolo! [That is Liszt or the devil!] Liszt heard Ricordi, who was present, whisper to one of his clerks. Five minutes had scarcely passed when Ricordi, with eloquent hospitality, had placed at the musician‘s disposal his villa in the Brianza, his box at the Scala, his equipage, his horses, his fifteen hundred scores.‖ 57 During this particular visit, Liszt was able to use Ricordi‘s box at La Scala to see a production of Donizetti's Marino Faliero58. Liszt had this commentary on the way Italian opera was performed:

In this blessed land, putting a serious opera on the stage is not at all a serious thing. A fortnight is generally time enough. The musicians of the orchestra and the singers, who are generally strangers to each other, and get no incitement from the audience…assemble inattentive, insensible, and troubled with catarrhs, not as artists, but as people who are paid for the music they make. There is nothing more icy than these Italian representations. No trace of nuances, in spite of the exaggeration of accent and gesture dictated by Italian taste, much less any effect d’ensemble. Each artist thinks only of himself, without troubling his thoughts about his neighbor. Why worry one‘s self for a public that does not even listen?59

While many might interpret this biting commentary as a critique of Italian opera, a careful reading shows these comments, in fact, as a harsh assessment of the manner in which it was produced. Liszt does not seem to be paying Italian taste much of a compliment, but he says nothing critical about the music itself. In effect, Liszt's choice to aggressively attack the method of rehearsal and performance could even be interpreted as

57 Lina Ramann, Franz Liszt: Artist and Man, 278.

58 Ibid, 279. Ramann lists the opera as Marino Faliero, but undoubtedly means Marino Faliero, which premiered in 1839.

59 Ibid, 279.

an attempt to defend the music itself from such shoddy representation. Whether or not

Liszt cared for Italian opera, however, is not particularly important for the purposes of this document. While Liszt wrote several critical statements about Italians and their artistic environments, as will be discussed in greater detail shortly, these criticisms do not necessarily reflect his opinion of Italian music. In fact, Liszt held Rossini, Donizetti, and

Mercadante in high esteem. Not only does the remainder of Liszt‘s time in Italy prove a familiarity with the style of Italian opera, but a complete proficiency in that style.

Liszt only stayed in Milan for a few days while on this trip, but his connection to

Milan would continue. After spending several months in Como, Liszt returned to Milan.

Ricordi, aware of Liszt‘s proximity to Milan, had been heavily advertizing Liszt‘s compositions. Milanese newspapers had declared that ―fortunate Italy lodged the finest pianist in the world.‖ Liszt even received a serenade at his residence on the lake of Como from the cousins of Prince Belgiojoso. Liszt's first Milan appearance involved playing in a six-pianist, three piano arrangement of the overture to Die Zauberflöte. Liszt‘s first solo performances, though, occurred between December 1837 and March 1838. The programs involved his own compositions, the Die Zauberflöte arrangement, and only one transcription of a Rossini song. These concerts were wildly popular, and led to a series of unique concerts at La Scala.

His concerts, however, against his will, took such a strange, not to say adventurous, turn, that it is certainly unique in the concert history of our century; but the Milanese were so enthusiastic at this that they forgot their former daily indispensable entertainments at the Scala, their prima donna, nay, even their want of susceptibility for the piano! At first Liszt‘s performances were wearied, they were too serious for them, and they complained of this to him. This gave Liszt the idea of letting the people choose the themes for improvisation, instead of doing so

himself, an idea which proved an excellent means of filling up the pauses and keeping up the attention of the audience.60

At the first of these concerts, Liszt began by playing three of his opera fantasies.

They were very well received, so he moved on to play one of his Prélude Études. Liszt reported, in a letter to the Parisian Gazette Musicale, ―Vengo al teatro per divertirmi e non per studiare! [I go to the theater to amuse myself and not to study!] called out a gentleman from the pit, thereby expressing, unfortunately, the feeling of a frightfully predominating majority.‖61 Liszt then continued playing the music the Milanese wanted to hear, complaining in this letter that he would like to have added some works of

Beethoven, Weber or Moscheles, but that after being accustomed to the ―sense awakening melodies of a Bellini, a Donizetti, or a Mercadante,‖ the public would not have been interested.62

Liszt‘s opinions of the Milanese, specifically, and Italians, in general, may have contributed to the perception that Liszt could not have had much Italian influence. At a minimum, his comments about the Milanese were inflammatory, and they likely have had a depressive effect on the historical perception of Liszt as Italian. In 1838, Liszt wrote one of his ―lettres d‘un bachelier ès musique‖ under the title ‗La Scala (1838)‘.63 As summarized by Hamilton, this letter had six main points:

60 Ibid, 290-291.

61 Ibid, 292.

62 Ibid, 293.

63 ―ès‖ means ―en matière de,‖ and is a contraction of ―en les‖. It is used only in a few expressions and before a plural noun. One modern example is ―Docteur ès sciences‖

(1) Despite recent improvements, La Scala is in a bad way. Liszt has never seen anything dirtier than the stairs or corridors.

(2) The theatre, mainly a venue for socialising, is patronised by all classes from the nobility to 'the man who waxes your boots'. Public morality is less prudish than in Paris - husbands are ignored while wives play blatant court to their lovers.

(3) The artistic appreciation of the audiences is very low. Elevated sentiments are foreign to them. 'Beethoven, Weber, I might even say Mozart are known...by name.'

(4) The operas themselves are composed routinely, to a pre-set design that negates any possibility of true creativity.

(5) Standards of performance and decor are so poor, probably because the low admission charges do not provide money for anything better. There is no interest in opera as drama; for the Italians, opera is nothing but a concert in costume.

(6) La Scala is in a state of decadence. Its one salvation might be if Rossini were to come to its aid with a new masterpiece.64

While this seems to be an accurate summary of Liszt's comments, it is difficult to accurately appraise Liszt's intent without looking at the comments in the context of the entire letter. While Liszt, without a doubt, did not offer many compliments about the

Milanese, one must take several factors into consideration when interpreting the significance of his comments. As Liszt later alluded to when defending his comments, the letter was intended for a Parisian audience, not for the Milanese. Since Liszt had a reputation as something of a panderer, one cannot be certain where his truthful opinion about the Milanese ends and where he begins to merely ingratiate himself with the

French. While Liszt uses portions of his letter to criticize the structure and hypocrisy of

64 Kenneth Hamilton, "Reminiscences of a Scandal-Reminiscences of La Scala: Liszt's Fantasy on Mercadante's "Il giuramento"," Cambridge Opera Journal Vol. 5, no. 3 (November 1993), 188, JSTOR.

French social circles, Liszt is free with compliments about the musical and artistic tastes of Paris, using comments such as,

I believe, however, that one should look elsewhere for the main reason behind the dearth of conversation, which even the Milanese themselves deplore. To make partridge pâté, the most logical mind of our times has said, first get yourself a partridge. Thus, to hold a conversation, first get yourself subjects for conversation; but where are they to be found in a country that has no political, literary, and artistic movements? In Paris, if we were suddenly to cut off all the parliamentary debates, the publication of new books, periodicals, and newspapers, to close all the theaters except the Opéra, and to suppose for the moment that all our great artists stopped producing, don't you think that the much-vaunted conversation of the Parisian salons would receive a death blow?65

While a passage such as this one would be well received by the Parisians, as would other, comparable passages, the less-than-enthralled reaction of the Milanese is certainly understandable. Perhaps Liszt thought the 'unsophisticated' Milanese would fail to read a Parisian music journal, but he was wrong. A translation of Liszt's letter appeared in the Milanese journal La moda, where the editor, Francesco Lampato, added his own rebuttal to Liszt's letter. Lampato's rebuttal addressed Liszt's criticism with a temperate response, according to Hamilton.66 Liszt responded by defending his original letter; he explained that he intended no harm and only had hoped to amuse his Parisian readers. Yet this initial Italian response was mild in comparison to what was soon to come. Il pirata declared a "War on Liszt," accusing him of "'vomiting insults against the

Milanese society,' of impugning the fidelity of wives and the honor of husbands and of

65 Franz Liszt, An Artist's Journey: Lettres d'un bachelier ès musique, trans. Charles Suttoni (Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1989), 75.

66 Hamilton, "Reminiscences of a Scandal-Reminiscences of La Scala: Liszt's Fantasy on Mercadante's "Il giuramento," 189, JSTOR.

offending everybody at La Scala - from the singers to the cleaner of chandeliers. For good measure it was added that Liszt was merely a Hungarian masquerading as a

Frenchman, and a talentless pianist to boot."67 Liszt's response to this second wave of attacks was to travel again to Milan and perform another concert at La Scala, but since

Liszt had excoriated Italian opera, he had to be very careful in choosing which operas to paraphrase!

If one approaches Liszt from the traditional view, this incident is all the information we would need to discount an Italian influence in Liszt. Liszt had deeply offended the Italian city most notably connected with Italian opera, he had expressed biting disdain for the operas presented there, and he had demeaned the musical sensitivities of the natives. Any inspiration, therefore, that had been absorbed by Liszt would have been merely coincidental and insignificant. Oversimplifications such as this, however, often fail to address the complexities of an issue. This case is one such example.

Liszt certainly did criticize the operas he heard at La Scala, and harshly at that.

To be fair, one must consider that his concern was with the specific operas themselves, rather than merely the style they employed. Liszt explained, "When I have given you the names of the operas performed at La Scala this winter, I will have said almost everything that I could say about them. Except for Mercadante's I Briganti and Il Giuramento, they have all vanished without a trace. Gli Arragonesi by Conti disappeared on its first night in a terrible storm of disapproval. Le Nozze di Figaro--yes, my friend, Le Nozze di

67 Ibid, 190.

Figaro as 'redone' by Ricci--and La Solitaria by Coccia had a very difficult time completing their announced runs. Then, La Cenerentola and Semiramide were revived at the season's close for Francilla Pixis's debut with the company." 68,69 Liszt makes it very clear in this letter that his issue was with the poor quality of the operas presented, not with Italian opera in general. In fact, there was an Italian composer with whom he was enamored: Gioacchino Rossini. Liszt continued, "Only two operas by Rossini? Alas, that is true. The great composer's works are no longer the foundation of the repertory in

Milan; the impresario holds them in reserve 'just in case,' as they say, since these masterpieces were so overplayed in the past...One might say that no musician could grow in the shade of Rossini's genius."70 Liszt makes several statements that indicate he held

Rossini in the highest esteem. So many, actually, that Hamilton forms the opinion that

Liszt made the situation at La Scala appear so dire as to encourage Rossini to return from retirement to "save" it.71

Furthermore, Liszt also makes it clear he does not hold the opinion that Milan is a musical wasteland. He even adds that, "there are few cities in Europe where music making is cultivated to the extent that it is by Milanese society."72 The targets of Liszt's

68 In fairness, Liszt is not discussing a remake of Mozart, but a remake of an earlier Ricci opera.

69 Franz Liszt, An Artist's Journey: Lettres d'un bachelier ès musique, 79.

70 Ibid, 79-80.

71 Hamilton, "Reminiscences of a Scandal-Reminiscences of La Scala: Liszt's Fantasy on Mercadante's "Il giuramento," 189, JSTOR.

72 Ibid, 84.

critique were the impresario of La Scala and the musical tastes of the opera loving masses. Liszt made it plain that he held Mercadante in high regard, and Rossini was a master composer. The fallout from Liszt's ill-worded letter may be responsible for the impression that an Italian presence in his composition was impossible, or at least would have been found detestable. Not only is that theory false, but Liszt's letter contained yet even more evidence of an Italian style in his music.

A final piece to the puzzle is this--how could Liszt have written so many pieces that are connected to bel canto opera without that idiom somehow working its way into

Liszt's compositional style? Many Liszt enthusiasts are aware of some of his well known opera paraphrases for solo piano, such as Réminiscences de Norma, Rigoletto: paraphrase de concert, and Valse de l’opéra Faust de Gounod. Liszt's operatically based works, though, do not end with these three. Most of his opera transcriptions are based upon Italian operas, even more than ones based upon French or German operas. It may be surprising, but Liszt wrote 36 non-vocal pieces that were based either on bel canto works or on non-operatic works of bel canto composers. To put this with more specificity, of Liszt's 338 catalogued complete works for solo piano, 29 were based upon bel canto operas or the other works of bel canto composers.73 These numbers do not include any of the songs that this document contends have an Italianate style, rather, these figures only includes works with a direct association to a bel canto composer or opera,

73 Alan Walker, et al. "Franz Liszt," Grove Music Online, Oxford Music Online, http://www.oxfordmusiconline.com/subscriber/article/grove/music/48265pg28/ (accessed December 30, 2008).

usually via the title of Liszt's work. Examining the timeline for the composition of these works is perhaps even more fascinating.

For example, Rossini was the inspiration for Liszt's fourth and fifth solo piano pieces, Sept variations brillantes sur un thème de Rossini and Impromptu brillant sur des thèmes de Rossini et Spontini, respectively, written in 1824, and coinciding with Liszt's early study with Paer. Sept variations uses themes from Rossini's Ermione, while

Impromptu brillant borrows themes from La donna del Lago and Armida. Beginning

Liszt's "Years of Pilgrimage," he continued to paraphrase Italian tunes with

Réminiscences de Lucia di Lammermoor, written in 1835. Once Liszt embarked on his

"Years of Pilgrimage," many of which were spent in Italy, he became prolific in the genre. Including works begun during the years 1835-9, Liszt wrote twelve solo piano pieces and one for piano and orchestra that were based upon bel canto operas or its composers' other works. While it could be argued that he was simply attempting to emulate the Italian style while spending time there, such an attempt to explain away the

Italian part of Liszt's output withstands little scrutiny. First, of Liszt's thirteen, bel canto- based pieces composed between 1835-9, only six were published in Italy. After Liszt moved away from Italy and entered a period of his life filled with recital tours across all of Europe, his composition of opera paraphrases continued. During these years 1837-49,

Liszt added seven more bel canto based works, yet absolutely none of them were

published in Italy. During Liszt's Weimar years and beyond, he added thirteen more bel canto style works, and only three of those were published in Italy.74 [See Table 1]

Table 1 -Bel canto works by period [works not published in Italy in Italics]75

Youth Years of Pilgrimage Recital Tours Weimar, Rome, Budapest

(1811-1835) (1835-1839) (1839-1847) (1848-1888)

Title Published Title Published Title Published Title Published

Sept variations Grande Réminiscences de France Réminiscences de brillantes sur France Austria paraphrase de la Lucia di Germany Lucrezia Borgia Germany un thème de England France marche de Lammermoor Italy (2 versions) Rossini Donizetti

Impromptu Concert brillant sur des Marche funèbre et I puritani, France France England paraphrase on an un thèmes de Cavatine de Lucie introduction et England Germany Germany operatic theme published Rossini et de Lammermoor polonaise [Ernani] Spontini

Grande fantaisie sur France Deux Réminiscences de France des motifs de Niobe Germany transcriptions Germany Norma Germany [Pacini] Austria Italy d’après Rossini

France Valse à capriccio Sonnambula de La serenata et Austria Germany sur deux motifs de Bellini (Pno 4 Germany L‘orgia, [Rossini] France Italy Lucia et Parisina hands)

La pastorella France Rigoletto: Marche funèbre de dell‘Alpi e Li Germany France paraphrase de Germany Dom Sébastien marinari Italy concert

Marche et cavatine de

Réminiscences des Lucia di Miserere du Germany Germany Germany Puritains de Bellini Lammermoor (Pno 4 Trovatore

hands)

74 Ibid. The list of works used this chapter combines the complete catalogues of Chiappari, Raabe, Searle, and a catalogue in process by Charnin Mueller and Eckhardt, with comments from Walker.

75 Ibid.

Youth Years of Pilgrimage Glanzzeit Weimar, Rome, Budapest

(1811-1835) (1835-1839) (1839-1847) (1848-1888)

Title Published Title Published Title Published Title Published

Soirées Ernani: [2nd] France ‘Spirto gentil’ de Soirées musicales France musicales England paraphrase de Germany Italy l’opéra La favorite [Rossini] Italy [Rossini] concert

Aria ‘Cujus Austria un Hexaméron [Bellini] animam’ von Italy published Rossini, org/trmb

Soirées italiennes Germany Don Carlos Germany

Piece based on Réminiscences de Italian opera unpublished Norma (two Germany melodies pianos) [Mercadante]

Ouverture de Aida, danza sacra l’opéra Guillaume Germany Italy e duetto final Tell

Grandes variations Agnus Dei della de concert sur un France Messa di Requiem Italy thème des Puritains di G. Verdi pno/orch

Fantaisie sur des France Agnus Dei de la

motifs favoris de (v. 1) Messe de Italy l’opéra La Germany Requiem,

sonnambula (v 2) org/hmn/pf

The surprising trend is that not only did Liszt continue composing bel canto related works after leaving Italy in 1839, he continued to compose them in large numbers while living in Weimar. In addition, these post-1839 compositions were rarely, if ever, published in Italy. If Liszt truly found the style so detestable, why continue writing in that style years after departing Italy and while not publishing these works there?

While largely circumstantial, the mounting evidence includes the influence of

Paer, Liszt's early composition teacher, Liszt's early exposure to and demonstrated knowledge of bel canto writing, his association with Ricordi, the staunch support of and respect for Rossini, and the prevalence of Liszt's compositions based in an Italianate style. There is a clear historical basis for the hypothesis that this bel canto style held such a significant place in Liszt's life that it may have spread beyond his keyboard writing.

CHAPTER VI

COMPARISON OF LISZT‘S ITALIAN SONGS TO BEL CANTO STYLE

The next step in the hunt for an Italian presence in Liszt's Italian songs is to search for musical similarities between his songs and the music of bel canto composers.

Before an accurate comparison can be made, it would be helpful to identify what musical characteristics comprise bel canto style. To claim an authoritative definition would be a fool's errand; the one thread present in all expert definitions of the term is that no concrete definition of bel canto exists.

For an initial definition, Owen Jander provides this definition in the Grove

Dictionary Online: "Generally understood, the term ‗bel canto‘ refers to the Italian vocal style of the 18th and early 19th centuries, the qualities of which include perfect legato production throughout the range, the use of a light tone in the higher registers and agile and flexible delivery. More narrowly, it is sometimes applied exclusively to Italian opera of the time of Rossini, Bellini and Donizetti. In either case, ‗bel canto‘ is usually set in opposition to the development of a weightier, more powerful and speech-inflected style associated with German opera and Wagner in particular.‖76 Philip Duey in his book, Bel

Canto in Its Golden Age, states, "There is no such standard definition although there does seem to be a usage which has gradually found favor not only in music dictionaries but in

76 Owen Jander and Ellen T. Harris. "Bel Canto," Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online, http://www.oxfordmusiconline.com/subscriber/article/grove/music/02551/ (accessed January 9, 2009).

general lexicons as well. It runs like this: 'Bel canto...denotes the Italian vocal technique of the 18th century with its emphasis on beauty of tone and brilliant virtuosity, rather than dramatic expression or romantic emotion.'"77 This definition refers to bel canto as a vocal technique and not as a style of composition, and therefore does not help define the term for the purposes of this document. Duey's comment regarding the difficulty of defining the term, however, seems to convey a continuing theme. While surveying the development of the term bel canto through various nations and centuries, Duey echoes another of Jander's sentiments with this statement: "It is important to note the growing concern of Italian authors over the aggressions of the German stile parlante and the corresponding fate of their own bel canto."78 In another attempt to define the term, James

Stark, in Bel Canto: A History of Vocal Pedagogy, echoes and expands upon one of

Jander's observations, noting that, "many listeners today associate bel canto primarily with Rossini, Donizetti, Bellini, and perhaps early Verdi."79 While these statements say little about compositional style, they identify two important points. First, bel canto is often the style associated with the style of Rossini, Bellini, and Donizetti. Second, a distinctive characteristic of bel canto music is a focus on virtuosity. Berton Coffin, in Bel

Canto: Principles and Practices, offers a more specific definition. "It was a time of wonderfully compelling voices of great limpidity, extremely wide range, amazing

77 Philip A. Duey, Bel canto in Its Golden Age (New York: King's Crown Press, 1951), 3.

78 Ibid, 7.

79 James Stark, Bel Canto: A History of Vocal Pedagogy (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1999), xix.

flexibility and beautiful quality...As a general rule voices having a high tessitura were greatly preferred to lower voices and the operatic hero and heroine were always the tenor and soprano."80 Giulio Silva argues, as does Coffin, that beauty of tone are at the center of bel canto style: "It was called thus because the singers and composers of the time were devoted, first and foremost, to the pure musical beauty of melody and the singing voice...thus lyricism attained its loftiest heights in Italy, through the efforts of composers and singers, with the culminating splendor of the school of bel canto in the eighteenth century and the beginning of the nineteenth."81

Finally, Luigi Dallapiccola offers a musical and textual connection in bel canto writing. He admits that no treatise has addressed the principles of composition in Italian opera, but Dallapiccola creates a theory of his own. His analysis indicates that Italian composers, specifically Rossini, Bellini, Donizetti, and Verdi, take texts and make the music (or the text, Petrarch specifically) fit a specific musical framework. A simplified explanation of his theory is this: a section of music can be divided into four sections, either melodically or harmonically, and the first two sections build to a climax toward the end of third section, with the fourth portion offering some type of diminuendo.82

80 Berton Coffin, Bel Canto: Principles and Practice (New York: Coleman-Ross Company, Inc, 1950), 10-11.

81 Giulio Silvia, trans. Baker, Theodore, "The Beginnings of the Art of "Bel Canto": Remarks on the Critical History of Singing," The Musical Quarterly Vol. 8, no. 1 (January 1922), 53, JSTOR.

82 Luigi Dallapiccola, "Words and Music in Nineteenth-Century Italian Opera," Perspectives of New Music Vol. 5, no. 1 (Autumn-Winter 1966), 121-124, JSTOR.

While none of these definitions are or were intended to be complete, there are several criteria from these previous studies that will serve to create a composite definition of bel canto style. It will be possible, at that point, to identify characteristics of Liszt's compositions that represent the ideas presented in those criteria. Direct connections then can be made between Liszt's music and that of Bellini, Rossini, and Donizetti. This exercise is not designed to provide a comprehensive answer to an age-old question; rather, the purpose is to provide a reasonable framework for comparison. For the purposes of this document, the criteria of bel canto compositional style are:

1) Music that requires a display of virtuosity

2) Music that requires a large vocal range, particularly for higher voices

3) Music that favors a lyric, legato, melodically-based line over a more declamatory, text-driven, Germanic style

4) Music that often uses a regular phrase structure with a climax occurring in the third unit of a larger group of phrases

5) Music written in the style of Italian opera composers from the late 18th and early 19th centuries

There are two obvious ways in which Liszt requires virtuosity is his Italian songs.

First, and as will be discussed later in greater detail, the high tessitura of these pieces is quite extreme. Second, demanding cadenzas appear in two of Liszt's Tre sonetti di

Petrarca. The first appearance of a cadenza is in "Pace non trovo," as seen in Figure 1:

Fig. 1 - Pace non trovo m. 189

A similar cadenza exists at the end of "Benedetto sia'l giorno," as seen in Figure 2:

Fig. 2 -Benedetto sia'l giorno mm. 83-90

Both of these cadenzas demonstrate standard bel canto traits. First, the singer is left temporarily unaccompanied for a moment of vocal display. Second, both cadenzas show

off extreme range, reaching D♭5. This matches with innumerable examples from

Rossini, Donizetti and Bellini, such as this example from Donizetti's aria "Una furtive lagrima" from L'elisir d'amore:

Fig. 3 - "Una furtiva lagrima" mm. 44-49

The second characteristic of bel canto is a use of extreme range, primarily the higher portions of the soprano and tenor ranges. Not only do Figures 1 and 2 demonstrate two instances of this principle in use by Liszt, the unusually high tessitura is more remarkable when viewed as a trend throughout the Petrarch sonnets. In the three songs, Liszt uses a range encompassing two octaves and a minor 2nd, compiling a total of seventeen A♭ 5s, two A 5s, three B♭ 5s, three B 5s, and three D♭ 5s. This remarkably high tessitura is far more consistent with Italian-style vocal writing than with the writing of

Liszt's German/Austrian, 19th century contemporaries. In fact, one common point of distinction between bel canto writing and later 19th century Italian vocalism, such as

Puccini or late Verdi, is that bel canto composers favored a higher, lighter instrument, whereas later composers preferred a more robust, dramatic sound.83

The third trait of bel canto writing is a focus on lyricism rather than declamation; the value of melody over text. Again, another difficult term to define enters the discussion, but when presented as the antonym of declamation, the meaning of lyricism becomes a bit clearer. An excellent example of lyricism presents itself in the aria "Spirto gentil" from Donizetti's La Favorita:

83 Stark, xviii.

Fig. 4 -"Spirto gentil" mm. 25-39

This example demonstrates one of Donizetti's lyric qualities: the use of repeated pitches at a fairly slow tempo (mm.25-29), rubato via rallentandi and stringendi, and a standard, pre-cadential location for a cadenza, such as on beat four of m. 37. Each of these traits has a parallel in Pace non trovo. First, Liszt gives twelve different temporary tempo

indications, such as ritenuto, ritardando, accelerando, etc. Second, Liszt repeats the same pitch at least twice nine separate times, such as the example in Figure 5:

Fig. 5 - Pace non trovo mm. 43-51

Measures 45 and 46 show four repeated C4s, while mm. 49 and 50 offer three B♭ 4s, much like Donizetti's use of repeated pitches at the beginning of phrases, such as in mm.

25 and 29 in Figure 4. Liszt also employs this technique at the conclusion of I' vidi in terra angelici costumi, seen in Figure 6:

Fig. 6 - I' vidi in terra angelici costumi mm. 62-69

The fourth characteristic of bel canto writing, according to Dallapiccola, deals with phrase structure and its relationship with text. He contends that bel canto composers tend to use either four-line phrases to match a four-line stanza of poetry, or by adjusting the music or poetry so that divisions of four are still possible. He continues, "I should like to reemphasize that the emotional crescendo is normally found in the third line (in a

four-line stanza) or in the third pair of lines (in an eight-line stanza)."84 Liszt provides an excellent example of this technique in Pace non trovo:

Fig. 7 - Pace non trovo mm. 54-61

This fits Dallapiccola's pattern perfectly; the four section phrase builds toward a climax in the third, two-measure section, with the fourth section providing some kind of diminuendo. This type of phrasing occurs throughout "Angiolin dal biondo crin," such as in Figure 8:

Fig. 8 - Angiolin dal biondo crin mm. 6-10

84 Dallapiccola, 124.

This four-measure phrase offers one measure per poetic line, with the crescendo blossoming at the end of the third section, then lowering in pitch to finish the fourth section.

Finally, Liszt mirrored Italian composers of the early 19th century using tools that can be observed more broadly than those that have just been examined. For instance, one can compare the basic form of "Pace non trovo" to the form of Verdi's "Ella mi fu rapita...Parmi veder le lagrime" from Rigoletto and observe striking similarities.

Rigoletto was written later than the Petrarch sonnets, but the comparison here is of Liszt's musical characteristics to bel canto, and then to Verdi by association, with bel canto writing as a common denominator. The contention is not that Rigoletto influenced the sonnets directly, but rather they share bel canto writing as a common trait. This is similar to how historians see a stylistic connection between Liszt and Wagner without necessarily contending Wagner copied Liszt (or vice versa).

Pace non trovo clearly appears to divide into a recitative and aria format; the first

31 measures are filled with both secco and accompagnato sections, brief, disconnected vocal fragments, and tremolos in the accompaniment. Liszt gives a "declamato" marking for the voice in m. 6, indicating the secco portion of the recitative, much like the opening section of Verdi's recitative. For the accompagnato sections, examine these excerpts from each recitative:

Fig. 9- "Ella mi fu rapita" from Rigoletto mm. 44-56

Fig. 9b- Pace non trovo mm. 12-26

In both examples, there is a use of treble tremolo in the accompaniment (mm. 46-

49 of "Ella mi fu rapita" and mm. 14-20 of Pace non trovo), and each tremolo section is followed by the climactic, unaccompanied high note of the recitative. Both Verdi and

Liszt then connect the recitatives to a lyric aria, each exhibiting the same types of similarities as those earlier in the chapter. A marked difference in Liszt, however, is the avoidance of the cavatina-cabaletta form that was made famous by bel canto composers.

At the end of Liszt's cavatina, no cabaletta follows.

This chapter can only serve as a brief survey of the musical connection between

Liszt's songs and bel canto composers; a thorough analysis could constitute a study topic entirely its own. However, by attempting to forge a basic definition for an elastic term such as bel canto, it becomes possible to see several musical areas of connection between

Liszt's writing in his Italian songs and the operatic writing of Donizetti, Bellini, and

Rossini. The purpose here is not to demonstrate that Liszt's Italian songs are wholly

Italian. To attempt to define Liszt in such a narrow manner would be as over-simplistic as those who try to define him as almost exclusively German. Rather, one of the unique attributes of Liszt is his cosmopolitan background; he was a Hungarian who took on

French as his preferred tongue, yet identified with the composers of the New German

School while travelling throughout all of Europe. The stylistic similarity between Liszt's vocal writing and the compositions of the bel canto greats offers further evidence that it is difficult to sustain any view of Liszt that denies the Italian quality of these Italian songs.

CHAPTER VII

COMPARISON OF LISZT'S FIRST AND SECOND VERSIONS OF TRE SONETTI DI PETRARCA

There is one final composer against whom Liszt should be measured. This additional comparison may provide further evidence that, around his years in Italy, Liszt displayed the compositional traits of bel canto composers. The composer for this last comparison is, of course, also Franz Liszt. The first Liszt is the relatively young composer who wrote the Petrarch Sonnets between 1839 and 1842. The second Liszt is the one who revised the sonnets between 1864 and 1882. The first Liszt had spent the years preceding the first versions of the Petrarch Sonnets primarily in Italy, absorbing

Italian compositional style, as outlined in Chapter IV. The second Liszt made the alterations in the sonnets after his Weimar years, once he was firmly linked to Wagner and the New German School.

A small amount of scholarly study has already been devoted to the comparison of the first and second versions of Liszt‘s Petrarch Sonnets.85,86 The purpose of this previous work, however, was to compare the two versions to illustrate their differences.

No attempt was made to put these differences in an historical context. When viewed in

85 Monika Hennemann, Liszt's Lieder, in The Cambridge Companion to Liszt, ed. Ben Arnold (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 192-205.

86 Ben Arnold, "Songs and Melodramas," in The Liszt Companion, 403-438.

light of the work already carried out by this document, though, a proper context allows for additional conclusions to be drawn about Liszt.

Liszt revised approximately a fourth of his songs. In addition, he also set a few previously used texts to entirely new music.87 According to Ben Arnold in The Liszt

Companion, there are observable trends in Liszt‘s revisions. Most commonly, Liszt retains the original vocal line of the song, making only a few adjustments. Arnold continues,

[Liszt] often reduces the vocal ranges and simplifies virtuoso passages. He substantially lowers the range, for example, in the second version of Der du von dem Himmel bist, Der Fischerknabe, and the Petrarch Sonnets. At times, however, he increases the difficulties…Liszt also corrects text-setting problems in almost all of his revisions as noted above…Liszt usually reduces the texture and simplifies the role of the piano in his revision…He acknowledged the trend toward simplification in a letter to Joseph Dessauer in the 1850s: ‗My earlier songs are mostly too ultra sentimental, an frequently too full in the accompaniment.‘ He made a similar remark in a letter to Louis Köhler in 1853 where he mentioned simplifying the accompaniments in his revisions…Lizst greatly lightens the piano textures in several songs.88

Arnold also indicates that while many of Liszt‘s revisions improve upon their predecessors, several of the revisions ―diminish the spirit and genuineness of [the] earlier compositions.‖89 One of the improvements that Arnold notes is an improvement of text setting, but ―while there uniformly may be significant improvements in text setting in the

87 Ibid, 414.

88 Ibid, 415.

89 Ibid, 416.

latter versions, the first versions show a musical originality and an overall spirit that are often lacking in the latter stripped-down versions.‖90

It is interesting that Liszt held his revisions of the Petrarch Sonnets in very high esteem. He stated, ―I hesitate to publish the second original version (very modified and more subtle) for voice, because to express the sentiment that I tried to breathe into the musical notation of these Sonnets, it would be necessary for some poetic singer [to be] in love with an ideal of love.‖91 Scholars, however, disagree with Liszt's assessment.

Arnold states, ―Liszt‘s Tre Sonetti di Petrarca provide the best examples of revisions less effective than the original compositions.‖92 In addition to Arnold‘s critique, Monika

Hennemann adds, ―The bare musical notation, almost skeletal in comparison to the ornate profusion of the original version, hardly seems to express the intensity of feeling felt by the composer, despite some finer points of declamation. Few have preferred the etiolated

1883 edition of the sonnets to their passionate and exuberant originals.‖93

The previous chapter established a connection between the first versions and bel canto opera. An important step in this study is to compare the differing versions of the

Petrarch Sonnets in an attempt to see if these revisions fit the trends of Liszt‘s other revisions, as outlined above. Once the differences between versions are clear, it will be

90 Ibid, 416.

91 Franz Liszt and La Mara, Franz Liszts Briefe: Briefe an eine Freundin (Leipzig: Breitkopf und Härtel, 1894), Vol. 8, 368.

92 Ben Arnold, The Liszt Companion, 416.

93 Monika Hennemann, Liszt's Lieder, in The Cambridge Companion to Liszt, 200.

possible to see if the revisions, and their unique characteristics, show the same similarity to bel canto opera.

It is difficult to believe that the revisions could have possibly sprung from their initial versions. The first area of revision is the area of tonality; Liszt transposed Sonnet

104, Pace non trovo, down from A♭to E major, Sonnet no. 47, Benedetto sia’l giorno, from A♭down to D♭, and Sonnet no. 123, I’ vidi in terra angelici costumi, from A♭down to F, all now for mezzo soprano or baritone. The next target for revision is form. Liszt radically changes the form of Pace non trovo by removing the opening recitative section entirely (see Figures 10 and 10a). In fact, a new recitative section appears unaccompanied in mm. 75-77 of the second version, with a new recitative finishing the piece in mm. 78 to the end. The form of the other sonnets is not altered as radically as

Pace non trovo. Sonnets no. 47 and 123 do, however, serve as excellent examples of another area of marked revision: melody.

Fig. 10 -Pace non trovo (1st version) mm. 1-11

Fig. 10b -Pace non trovo (2nd version) mm. 1-17

Liszt alters the melodies of the Petrarch Sonnets in three key ways. First, the melodies use a markedly narrower vocal range than what appears in the first versions.

While the first versions, including the ossia passages, use a two-octave range, the second

versions only encompass a 10th in Sonnet no. 47, an augmented 8ve in Sonnet no. 104, and a minor 9th in Sonnet no. 123. Second, Liszt removed several of the virtuosic passages from the revisions. For instance, as evidenced by the limited range cited above, all of the high notes were removed from Pace non trovo. Not only have the pitches been altered, many of the passages have been removed entirely; one such example is the florid passage

(mm. 25-26, first version) that leads to the A5 in Pace non trovo. As mentioned above,

Liszt removed the opening recitative and set the original text to new music in the second version. This florid passage, therefore, is absent from the second version. Furthermore, none of the ossia passages from the first versions exist in Liszt‘s revisions. These ossia passages contained all of the high, virtuosic moments and cadenzas in the first versions.

This revision by omission continued into the other sonnets; none of the sonnet revisions contain any of the original ossia or cadenza-style passages.

Finally, Liszt changed the nature of his melodies in his revisions. As Arnold notes, ―In the second version of the sonnets he improves some text-setting errors, but he also reduces the melodic variety, waters down the previously brilliant pianism, and removes much of the torrid passion that made the first versions so wonderful. In each of the revisions he throws in unaccompanied recitatives that disrupt the lyrical mood so prevalent in the early versions.‖94 This more declamatory nature of the revisions can be seen in this example in Figures 11 and 11a, from Benedetto sia’l giorno:

94 Ben Arnold, The Liszt Companion, 416.

Fig. 11 -Benedetto sia'l giorno (1st version) mm. 17-32

Fig. 11a -Benedetto sia'l giorno (2nd version) mm. 19-33

Note the marked differences in declamation; in the first version, the vocal line is unbroken in m. 17 on the text, ―da duo begli occhi che legato m‘hanno,‖ as well as including a virtuosic embellishment in m. 22. Liszt repeats text as well, which allows for a more demanding vocal moment during the repetition in m. 20. In the second version, the quarter-note/eighth-note triplet pattern properly stresses the accented syllable, but it also creates an over-accentuated, stilted effect. In the revision, Liszt omits the repeated text, and therefore the lyric climax.

After examining these differences, it is useful to see which changes follow Liszt‘s typical pattern of revision. The earlier, established pattern includes maintaining the initial melody with minor adjustment. Clearly, Liszt did not follow his pattern in this regard. Second, Liszt lowers the pitch level and removes much of the virtuosity. In this area, Liszt followed his pattern. Arnold also notes that Liszt typically corrects text setting problems in his revisions and makes the melody more declamatory. This trait also holds true to the pattern; Liszt adds recitatives in new places and makes the melody more text-driven, as discussed above.

The final question is to figure out why Liszt followed the pattern in some respects, but drifted from his normal approach when it came to altering the melody. The answer perhaps may be found by drawing upon previous chapters of this document. Liszt wrote the first versions shortly after living primarily in Italy. These versions exhibit lyric melodies, outbursts of romantic passion, a high tessitura, and virtuosic displays. These trademarks are all in line with the qualities of bel canto vocal writing, as outlined in

Chapter VI. Furthermore, these identifying marks of bel canto oppose the 19th century

view of vocal writing that is considered more Germanic in nature. The revisions, which take on this German character, were written after Liszt‘s time in Weimar and his attachment to the New German School. There certainly are a variety events that could have motivated Liszt to make these sonnets less passionate and more somber, not the least of which is Liszt's propensity for failed romance. These mitigating factors notwithstanding, the historical evidence for bel canto traits in Liszt's Italian vocal writing is compelling. The timeline of Liszt‘s life seems to support this idea of an Italian inspiration in his earlier writing. It would seem to be beyond the realm of coincidence that, while living in Italy, Liszt‘s vocal writing would mirror the distinguishing traits of that unique national style, and then, while at Weimar, his German writing would take on clear hallmarks of that distinct national style. As a result, it is reasonable and likely that

Liszt's revisions of the Petrarch Sonnets provide further evidence that the first versions of these songs bear a strong connection to bel canto vocal writing.

CHAPTER VIII

CONCLUSION

Defining a composer's place in history is no small task. No matter how carefully done, a person's lifetime cannot be divided into unambiguous pieces, his or her beliefs cannot be simplified, and a style cannot be boxed. In an attempt to retell history, though, generalization is often the most efficient way to tell a composer's story. With some historical figures, this approach may be partially appropriate, but with Franz Liszt this simple view is terribly imprecise. Perhaps more than any composer, Franz Liszt is a man of many countries and varied influences. Born in Hungary, his career took him through nearly all of the lands in Europe, with extended contact in France, Italy, England,

Hungary, and Germany. When Liszt's cosmopolitan nature is often acknowledged, the foolhardiness of labeling him as 'German', 'French' or 'Italian' becomes readily apparent.

Unfortunately, this mistake is one that historians have made for years.

Of course, not all historians have oversimplified Liszt; such a blatant error would have likely been adjusted a long time ago. There is a more nuanced approach available; one that insulates the argument from obvious scrutiny by forcing Liszt into a box where much of his writing and life can truthfully exist. In this modern approach, Liszt is identified cosmopolitan, but then the focus moves quickly onto the 'German' aspects of

Liszt's life and compositions. This argument, perhaps unintentionally, still continues the

belief that Liszt is 'German' by focusing nearly exclusively on those portions of his output, to the exclusion of the other aspects of his output. This effect was observed in

Chapter III. Those compositions that do not fit into this box receive scant attention in scholarly literature, and certainly the aspects that are not 'German' are either missed or discussed very briefly. This effect was noted in Chapter IV.

Unfortunately, Liszt simply cannot be viewed simply. He was a very complex person, filled with fascinating contradictions. On one hand, he was a staunch Catholic, while, on the other hand, he had more than one romantic partner, extramarital affairs, and illegitimate children. He was Hungarian, but strongly preferred French as his native tongue. While he valued the vision of Die Kunst der Zukunft, not all of his music fits that mold. His Italian songs epitomize this spirit of incongruity. As outlined in Chapter V, there is ample historical evidence of an Italian vein in Liszt's vocal writing. Liszt spent a great deal of time in Italy, his other compositions, both for the piano and voice, demonstrate not only an awareness, but a fluency in the style of bel canto opera composers. His Italian songs share several, key characteristics with bel canto style, and his revisions of the Petrarch Sonnets remove the Italian elements and replace them with a style that is clearly more German.

While this document only begins to scratch the surface of a new area of research, this is a study that is well overdue. These Italian songs of Liszt are among his most commonly performed songs, yet, as was established earlier, they receive far less scholarly attention than Liszt's other works or other songs. It is clear that Liszt provides a conundrum for historians. The intent of this document is not to prove that historians have

been wrong, misguided, or disingenuous. In fact, this paper cannot demonstrate with certainty that Liszt is truly "Italian." It can, however, begin a dialogue and reveal the need for more research in this fascinating area. Whenever it seems that a composer is completely understood, musicians and historians eventually discover the need for more scrutiny and greater discourse. An Italian view of Liszt should spark such discussion without doubt.

WORKS CITED

Arnold, Ben. "Franz Liszt: An Autobiographical and Virtuosic Revolution." In Liszt the Progressive, ed. Hans Kagebeck and Johan Lagerfelt. Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press, 2001. ———. "Piano Music: 1835-1861." In The Liszt Companion, ed. Ben Arnold. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2002. ———. "Songs and Melodramas." In The Liszt Companion, ed. Ben Arnold. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2002. Coffin, Berton. Bel Canto: Principles and Practice. New York: Coleman-Ross Company, Inc, 1950. Dallapiccola, Luigi. "Words and Music in Nineteenth-Century Italian Opera." Perspectives of New Music Vol. 5, no. 1 (Autumn-Winter 1966): 121-133. JSTOR. Deaville, James. "Liszt in the German-Language Press." In The Liszt Companion, ed. Ben Arnold. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2002. Donizetti, Gaetano. La Favorita. Edited by F. Jannetti. Milan: Ricordi, 1944. ———. L'elisir d'amore. Edited by Mario Parenti. Milan: Ricordi, 1960. Duey, Philip A.. Bel canto in Its Golden Age. New York: King's Crown Press, 1951. Gibbs, Christopher H. "Just Two Words. Enormous Success." In Franz Liszt and His World, ed. Christopher Gibbs and Dana Gooley. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006. Grout, Donald Jay and Claude V. Palisca. A History of Western Music. 6th ed. New York: W.W. Norton and Co, 2001. Hamburger, Klara. "Program and the Hungarian Idiom in the Sacred Music of Liszt." In New Light on Liszt and His Music: Essays in Honor of Alan Walker’s 65th Birthday. Franz Liszt Study Series No. 6, ed. Alan Walker, Michael Saffle and James Deaville. Stuyvesant, NY: Pendragon Press, 1997.

Hamilton, Kenneth. "Reminiscences of a Scandal-Reminiscences of La Scala: Liszt's Fantasy on Mercadante's "Il giuramento"." Cambridge Opera Journal Vol. 5, no. 3 (November 1993): 187-198. JSTOR, . Hennemann, Monika. Liszt's Lieder. In The Cambridge Companion to Liszt, ed. Ben Arnold. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. Huneker, James. Franz Liszt. New York: C. Scribner's Sons, 1911. Jander, Owen and Ellen T. Harris. "Bel Canto." Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online. http://www.oxfordmusiconline.com/subscriber/article/grove/music/02551/ (accessed January 9, 2009). Liszt, Franz. An Artist's Journey: Lettres d'un bachelier ès musique. Translated by Charles Suttoni. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1989. ———. Angiolin dal biondo crin. Edited by Richard Miller. New York: International Music Company, 1998. ———. Tre sonetti di Petrarca. Edited by Richard Miller. New York: International Music Company, 1998. ———. Tre sonetti di Petrarca. 1st Version. Edited by Peter Raabe. Franz Liszts Musikalische Werke. Vol 7/1. Leipzig: Breitkopf und Härtel, 1966. ———. Tre sonetti di Petrarca. 2nd Version. Edited by Peter Raabe. Franz Liszts Musikalische Werke. Vol. 7/3. Leipzig: Breitkopf und Härtel, 1966. Liszt, Franz and La Mara. Franz Liszt's Briefe: Briefe an eine Freundin. Leipzig: Breitkopf und Härtel, 1894. Morrow, Mary Sue. "Deconstructing Brendel's 'New German' Liszt." In Liszt and the Birth of Modern Europe: Music As a Mirror of Religious, Political, Cultural, and Aesthetic Transformations : Proceedings of the International Conference Held at the Villa Serbelloni, Bellagio (Como) 14-18 December 1998. Franz Liszt Study Series No. 9, ed. Saffle, Michael, and Rossana Dalmonte. Hillsdale, NY: Pendragon Press, 2003. Ramann, Lina. Franz Liszt: Artist and Man. London: W.H. Allen and Co, 1882. Saffle, Michael. Franz Liszt: A Guide to Research. New York: Garland, 1991. ———. Liszt in Germany, 1840-1845 : a study in sources, documents, and the history of reception. Stuyvesant, NY: Pendragon Press, 1994. Schrickel, Leonhard. Geschichte des Weimarer Theaters von seinen Anfängen bis heute. Weimar: Panses Verlag, 1928. Searle, Humphrey. The Music of Liszt. New York: Dover Publications, 1966.

Seroff, Victor. Franz Liszt. New York, NY: Books for Libraries Press, 1970. Short, Michael. Franz Liszt Study Series. Edited by Michael Saffle. Liszt Letters in the Library of Congress. Hillsdale, NY: Pendragon Press, 2003. Shulstad, Reeves. "Liszt's Symphonic Poems." In The Cambridge Companion to Liszt, ed. Kenneth Hamilton. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. Silvia, Giulio, trans. Baker, Theodore. "The Beginnings of the Art of "Bel Canto": Remarks on the Critical History of Singing." The Musical Quarterly Vol. 8, no. 1 (January 1922): 53-68. JSTOR. Sitwell, Sacheverell. "Liszt Timeline." In Reflections on Liszt, ed. Alan Walker. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2005. Stark, James. Bel Canto: A History of Vocal Pedagogy. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1999. Stolba, K. Marie. The Development of Western Music. 3rd ed. Boston: The McGraw Hill Companies, 1998. Walker, Alan et al. "Franz Liszt." Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online. http://www.oxfordmusiconline.com/subscriber/article/grove/music/48265pg28/ (accessed December 30, 2008). Walker, Alan, Maria Eckhardt, Rena Chernin Mueller. "Franz Liszt." Grove Music Online. http://www.grovemusic.com.proxy.libraries.uc.edu/ (accessed February 23, 2007). Walker, Alan. Franz Liszt: The Early Years. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1983. ———. Franz Liszt: The Man and His Music. New York: Taplinger Publishing Company, 1979. ———. Franz Liszt: The Weimar Years. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1989. ———. Reflections on Liszt. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1995. Williams, Adrian. Portrait of Liszt: By Himself and His Contemporaries. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1990.